SHOOTING A CHINAMAN.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 201, 7 December 1871, Page 5

SHOOTING A CHINAMAN.

From the "Mount Ida Chronicle " we learn the particulars of the recent shoot- ; ing case which occurred at St. Nathans. It appears thab for the past six mouths several parties noticed a considerable diminution in the quantity of gold yielded by their washings- up. Suspicion pointed to two Chinamen residing in tho vicinity, who were observed never to work in the day time. Watches were set, but the gold still kept disappearing mysteriously, and until the morning of Sunday, the 26th ult., the pilferers were never delected. Between 2 and 3 o'clock on the morning of the day in question, a miner named James Leonard, while working in Kwing's claim, observed a man come down the bank and proceed to a tub wherein the cloths were washed, and which at the time contained a considerable quantity of goJd mixed with sand. Seeiug the man stoop over the claim, as if in the net of taking something, he immediately gave chase. Just before he reached tlie man, the latter dropped something, which was afterwards found to be a dish containing sand and gold similar to that in the tub. Leonard overtook the man, overpowered him, and tied him up with a leather strap and his own pigtail. He then rushed <>tf to Ewing's hut, yelled out " Chinaman " at the top of his voice, and ran back to watch his prisonur, who by this time hail got partially loose, and was making off. He seized him again, and commenced to drag him to Ewing's hut. Ewing came running towards them with a trun, ami when within a few yards, slightly raised it and tired — the charge entering the Chinaman under the right shoulder and right breast. Information was then given to the police at St. Nathan's and the Chinaman was removed to the Camp at Naseby the same Any. Ewiny, on being brought up on the chai'ge of shooting the Chinaman, reserved his defence and was committed for tri.il — bail bei?u» allowed, himself iv £200 aud two fsuretios of LIOO each. The Chinaman, Ah Cheow, pleaded guilty to the charge of stealing wash-dirt to the value of 1.2, and was sentenced to 3 months imprisonment', the Magistrate remarking that the small amount set forth iv the information (L 2) compelled him to deal with the case in a summary way, but that ho would have passed a much more severe sentence had it not, been that he looked upon the wound prisoner received as in some measure a punishment.